One reporter reacts to JKR's revelations

[delwynmarch]

lizzyben wrote:
> if JKR stated that Pavarti Patil is Hindu, & a 
> fan think that Hinduism is wrong and don't like 
> the idea of a Hindu character. Should JKR conform
> to that person's desire to not read about a Hindu 
> character?

Del replies:
With a name like Parvati Patil, would it be 
surprising that Parvati would turn out to be Hindu? 
No it wouldn't. Someone reading the name "Parvati 
Patil" would necessarily be aware that she might 
very well be Hindu. No such thing about DD being gay 
though: not only is he never hinted at as being gay, 
but *nobody else* in the entire WW is either! Until 
JKR said otherwise in an interview, there was simply 
NO gay characters in her books. None whatsoever. And 
thus no reason to expect DD to be gay.

> But why would JKR have to conform to someone else's 
> belief? I mean, Hindu people exist, just like gay 
> people exist, & it seems to me that JKR is free to 
> make her characters any religion or sexual 
> orientation without worrying about whether that 
> would conform to the morality or religious beliefs 
> of every possible fan.

Then why didn't she actually DO that? Why didn't 
she *write* DD as gay? Why didn't she have him SAY, 
in the books, "I was in love with GG"?

Instead, what she did, is that she DID "conform to 
the morality" of a large number of fans, by not 
mentioning homosexuality at all. She HID her true 
beliefs and instead deliberately presented DD in a 
view that she knew would make him more acceptable 
to a lot of people. And then once those people had 
BOUGHT and READ the books, she came out and said 
"oh yeah, he's gay, what's wrong with that?" That's 
just not right, IMO.  

> Indeed, there's no way she *could* if she wanted 
> to. Plenty of people think inter-racial 
> relationships are wrong, or witchcraft is wrong, 
> or women having a job is wrong - there's no way 
> JKR should or even could structure the novels so 
> as to avoid depicting anything that anyone could 
> disagree with.  

Indeed. And in the case of inter-racial 
relationships, and witchcraft, and women having a 
job, she put her quill where her mouth is: she 
wrote *in the books* about inter-racial relationships 
and withcraft and women having a job. It was then up 
to people who don't like those things to choose 
whether or not they would read the books.

But with homosexuality, JKR didn't do that at all. 
Instead, she pretended, for 7 entire books, to not 
want to tackle the issue of homosexuality, thus 
pandering to the wishes of a whole category of 
readers, and then once those readers had bought and 
read the books, she introduced homosexuality out of 
the blue. That's manipulative.

> IMO asking an author not to depict a gay character, 
> or banning books that do, is trampling on people's 
> rights to see or read something that does not
> conform with your own opinion.

Nobody is asking JKR to not depict DD as gay. In 
fact, it's precisely because she didn't do exactly 
that, that there's now a problem. 
 
> IMO, no, because she is expressing her own 
> viewpoint on that character. Readers are free to 
> accept or discard that opinion, just like they 
> are free to accept or discard her other 
> pronouncements about the characters.

Except that this doesn't seem to be how *she* sees 
things, judging from her interviews. When she says 
"he's my character", it's clear that she doesn't 
consider her words as just another "viewpoint", but 
as truth. And when she says things like (paraphrase) 
"I never doubted that a great wizard could be gay", 
how can this not be construed as a direct moral 
attack on those of her fans who don't want DD to be 
gay?

> So, in the interest of tolerating other people's 
> beliefs & opinions, she shouldn't express her own?

Not after pandering to those people's beliefs and 
opinions for 7 books, no, not IMO. I see this as 
totally despicable.

> The books are what they are.

Precisely. And in the books, NOBODY is gay and 
homosexuality doesn't even exist. That's the way 
JKR wrote those books, and she needs to deal with 
that now.

> IMO tolerance extends to allowing everyone to 
> have & express their own views - JKR is free to
> express her own opinions & beliefs, & readers are 
> free to express how they disagree w/those beliefs. 
> But neither has the right to silence the other. 

Except that she's trying to do just that: silence 
those fans who are outraged at her revelation that 
DD is gay. "He's my character" and "I never doubted 
that great wizards can be gay" are both ways to tell 
those outraged readers to get lost. Hence my protest.

Del